Two separate incidents in which children from different families were exposed to lead paint in a Rochester apartment must be viewed as a single occurrence for insurance purposes, even though the landlord attempted to remove the hazard between the first and second complaints and renewed his policy, a unanimous upstate appellate court has held.
The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, said that since the record is scant on what efforts landlord Tony Clyde Wilson made to eliminate the lead paint, and since lead paint has been illegal for at least 15 years, the only reasonable conclusion is that the original paint was the culprit in both incidences and, therefore, the policy’s noncumulation clause, applies.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]